XOEF vs. IWM

Last updated Apr 2, 2026

Compare and contrast key facts about iShares S&P 500 ex S&P 100 ETF (XOEF) and iShares Russell 2000 ETF (IWM).

XOEF and IWM are both exchange-traded funds (ETFs), meaning they are traded on stock exchanges and can be bought and sold throughout the day. XOEF is a passively managed fund by iShares that tracks the performance of the S&P 500 Ex-S&P 100 Select Index. It was launched on Jul 8, 2025. IWM is a passively managed fund by iShares that tracks the performance of the Russell 2000 Index. It was launched on May 22, 2000. Both XOEF and IWM are passive ETFs, meaning that they are not actively managed but aim to replicate the performance of the underlying index as closely as possible.

Performance

XOEF vs. IWM - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in iShares S&P 500 ex S&P 100 ETF (XOEF) and iShares Russell 2000 ETF (IWM). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

XOEF vs. IWM - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025
XOEF iShares S&P 500 ex S&P 100 ETF	2.96%	4.15%
IWM iShares Russell 2000 ETF	1.56%	10.75%

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, XOEF achieves a 2.96% return, which is significantly higher than IWM's 1.56% return.

XOEF

• 1D: 0.68%
• 1M: -4.86%
• YTD: 2.96%
• 6M: 3.90%
• 1Y: —
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

IWM

• 1D: 0.63%
• 1M: -5.23%
• YTD: 1.56%
• 6M: 3.44%
• 1Y: 26.43%
• 3Y*: 13.18%
• 5Y*: 3.47%
• 10Y*: 9.83%

*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

XOEF vs. IWM - Expense Ratio Comparison

XOEF has a 0.20% expense ratio, which is higher than IWM's 0.19% expense ratio. However, both funds are considered low-cost compared to the broader market, where average expense ratios usually range from 0.3% to 0.9%.

XOEF

iShares S&P 500 ex S&P 100 ETF

IWM

iShares Russell 2000 ETF

Return for Risk

XOEF vs. IWM — Risk / Return Rank

Compare risk-adjusted metric ranks to identify better-performing investments over the past 12 months.

IWM

IWM Risk / Return Rank: 65
IWM Sharpe Ratio Rank: 63
IWM Sortino Ratio Rank: 65
IWM Omega Ratio Rank: 56
IWM Calmar Ratio Rank: 72
IWM Martin Ratio Rank: 68

The rank (0–100) shows how this investment's returns compare to the risk taken. Higher = better. Based on the past 12 months of data, combining Sharpe, Sortino, and other metrics used by quantitative funds and institutional investors.

XOEF vs. IWM - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for iShares S&P 500 ex S&P 100 ETF (XOEF) and iShares Russell 2000 ETF (IWM). Risk-adjusted metrics are performance indicators that assess an investment's returns in relation to its risk, enabling a more accurate comparison of different investment options.

Risk / return metrics aren't available yet — we need at least 12 months of trading data to calculate them.

Sharpe Ratios by Period

	XOEF	IWM	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	—	1.15	—
Sharpe Ratio (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	—	0.15	—
Sharpe Ratio (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period	—	0.43	—
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	0.79	0.34	+0.44

Correlation

The correlation between XOEF and IWM is 0.87, which is considered to be high. That indicates a strong positive relationship between their price movements. Having highly-correlated positions in a portfolio may signal a lack of diversification, potentially leading to increased risk during market downturns.

Dividends

XOEF vs. IWM - Dividend Comparison

XOEF's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 0.87%, less than IWM's 1.02% yield.

	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017	2016	2015
XOEF iShares S&P 500 ex S&P 100 ETF	0.87%	0.63%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%
IWM iShares Russell 2000 ETF	1.02%	1.04%	1.15%	1.35%	1.48%	0.94%	1.04%	1.26%	1.40%	1.26%	1.38%	1.54%

Drawdowns

XOEF vs. IWM - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum XOEF drawdown since its inception was -7.66%, smaller than the maximum IWM drawdown of -59.05%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for XOEF and IWM.

Drawdown Indicators

	XOEF	IWM	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-7.66%	-59.05%	+51.39%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	—	-13.74%	—
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	—	-31.91%	—
Max Drawdown (10Y) Largest decline over 10 years	—	-41.13%	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-4.97%	-7.33%	+2.36%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-1.43%	-10.83%	+9.40%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	—	3.73%	—

Volatility

Volatility by Period

	XOEF	IWM	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	—	7.36%	—
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	—	14.48%	—
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	12.82%	23.18%	-10.36%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	12.82%	22.54%	-9.72%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	12.82%	22.99%	-10.17%